Three Philosophical Comrades for Negation of Free Will and Philosophical After Though to Prove Free Will

The free will, that means the possibility of both to do and not to do, contradicts three philosophical rules of “the necessity of the cause and the effect”, “the final cause is the cause for the agency of the agent”, and “the impossibility of preference without preponderant”. And from the other hand, because it is a possible meaning, it is impossible to be an attribute for the Necessary. The resolution of philosophers for this problem is to introduce another meaning for free will that is known as the “philosophical meaning of free will”. But in addition to corrupt consequences of the “philosophical meaning of free will” which the philosophers themselves also do not acknowledge them, their method in solving this contradiction is in contrast with logical principles and bases. Because, in the case of contradiction of an evident knowledge a theoretical one, logically we must reject the theoretical knowledge or, at least doubt about it and reexamine its arguments. Explicitly explaining this contradiction and mentioning the failure of philosophers’ resolution, the main purpose of this writing is to prove the necessity of revise in the abovementioned philosophical principles and rules.